1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 February 2017 b. Date Received: 21 February 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after three deployments, the applicant was not in the right frame of mind. The applicant believed that the chain of command let the applicant down and needed to get away from the situation with Family. The applicant thought that leaving without permission was the right thing to do and it seemed to be the only option. After some time for reflection, the applicant decided to return back to the unit to accept any consequences. As a result, the applicant received a general discharge under honorable conditions. The applicant recently come to realize, after many counseling sessions and group sessions, that the applicant suffers from PTSD and that the judgement was clouded by combat trauma. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, notes indicate the applicant was diagnosed with both Acute and Chronic PTSD while on active duty. The VA notes indicate the applicant is 80% service connected; 70% for PTSD. Based on the available medical documentation, the applicant has a mitigating Behavioral Health (BH) condition and therefore is a nexus between a BH diagnosis and the misconduct that led to separation. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 August 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (AWOL) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 January 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 January 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was absent without leave from his unit from 1 April until 27 December 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 January 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 10 January 2012, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 January 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 June 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 31 / GED / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 12B10, Combat Engineer / 8 years, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 9 April 2003 - 16 January 2006 / HD IADT, 4 November 2003 - 15 March 2004 / HD (Concurrent Service) AD, 29 August 2004 - 16 January 2006 / HD (Concurrent Service) RA, 17 January 2006 - 16 June 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (12 June 2008 - 5 September 2009), Kuwait/ Iraq (15 January 2005 - 29 December 2005), Iraq (31 July 2007 - 11 November 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-3, AFRMM, ACM-2CS, ICM-CS / The applicant's service record reflects he was awarded the HSM, however, the award is not reflected on his DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Three Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 11 April 2011; From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 11 May 2011; and, From "DFR," to "PDY," effective 27 December 2011. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 259 days (AWOL, 11 April 2011 - 26 December 2011) / Apprehended by Civilian Authorities j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Nashville Vet Center, dated 26 January 2017, which reflects the a Licensed Professional Counselor/Mental Health Service Provider determined that the applicant had PTSD symptoms which are most likely connected to his traumatic experiences serving in the Army. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; a self-authored letter; and, a VA letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: NIF 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c(1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends he was suffering from undiagnosed PTSD at the time of his misconduct. He provides a letter from the VA, which reflects the applicant does have PTSD symptoms, which are most likely service connected. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends that his chain of command let him down. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant contends that after his three deployments, he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 August 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20170003539 2